Send in the anti-GMO clowns

Send in the anti-GMO clowns

Every once in a while you read something that fires on all cylinders. That most recent something is an analysis on a Canadian website Troy Media. The junk science clowns behind the GMO scare is the last  installment of a four-part series  Quacks and Conspiracies.

The author, Alan McHughen systematically demolishes all the nonsense peddled by the anti-GMO crowd.

GMO technologies have been around since the early 1970s and have given us many useful products, from human insulin to safer crops grown with fewer pesticides. Moreover, in over 30 years of experience, according to authoritative sources such as the U.S. National Academies and the American Medical Association, there is not one documented case of harm to humans, animals or the environment from GM products.

That is an impressive track record, considering the extent of GM products in pharmaceuticals, agriculture, food and industrial applications. So why are so many still fearful of this technology? One simple answer is junk science and its carefully crafted use as a weapon of mass fear.

That’s it in a nutshell. McHughen goes on to take apart the nonsense peddlers like  Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the U.K.’s Soil Association, accusing them of  “fear-mongering,” and deploying “their considerable media-manipulating machinery to spread more scare stories.”

I wish he would have included the Organic Consumers Association, headed by anti-vaccine and professional activist. Ronnie Cummins, but hey, you can’t have everything. But all in all it’s a great piece and he even includes a video from Penn and Teller who castigate the activist groups and publicize Norman Borlaug who most people have probably never heard of.

In the video, P&T relate how in the early 2,000s, Greenpeace and other activists went to Zambia and urged the government to refuse the GM corn that was donated to help with a famine by saying it was “poison.”

According to the article,

As reported by the BBC, Mwanawasa duly locked up the food in the warehouses – the same GM corn eaten without incident by millions of Americans – and then watched his subjects die, insisting such a fate was preferable to eating “poison.” That is, until the starving Zambians broke into the warehouses and gorged themselves healthy on the allegedly poisonous corn.

Readers of this blog know that I can be harsh on anti-GMO activists and actions like they took in Zambia is why I do take a hardline. I think it’s criminal that well-fed westerners would deny starving people food because they have a problem with it.

I feel the same way about the Golden Rice issue. Here we have a solution to the problem that would prevent the deaths and blindness of millions of Third World children due to lack of Vitamin A. Activists, led by Greenpeace promote all kinds of bogus information about the rice and lobby governments to reject it. I’m sorry, I think that is advocating mass murder, pure and simple.

In a private email, a reader of this blog suggested I should tone it down so I don’t alienate the people I am trying to reach.  But I am not against the well-meaning people who are taken in by these groups. They think they are doing the right thing.

What I try to do is alert them to the fact they are being used by extremists and charlatans.  The downside of that is no one wants to think they’re a rube. I know whereof I speak. I used to fall for every bit of nonsense that came down the pike because it fit in with my worldview. Then I found out I was being a rube. Psychic Ouch.  So, I dusted off my ego and became the progressive contrarian. 

Since I started this blog, I’ve come to realize that maybe I’m not so much a contrarian in the strictest sense of the word. I think I defined myself by the rules of my tribe which makes me a contrarian. I look for the facts and evidence and if the facts and evidence  take me to different place, I have to go with it.

I hope that my posts are well-reasoned and evidence based, despite the sometimes strident tone.

Oh, of course I digressed once again from my original point. So let’s finish this one off with another quote from the article. It has to do with my bete noire, Jeffrey Smith.

 Meanwhile, the New World spawned another popular junk scientist in the person of Jeffrey Smith, who has penned several books decrying his perceived hazards of modern agriculture, saving the most potent venom for genetically modified crops and foods. Smith’s self-published, non-peer-reviewed Genetic Roulette, for example, expounds upon already questionable reports – almost all from non-peer-reviewed sources – in a confident, technical voice that suggests that he actually has some scientific or medical credentials. However, closer inspection of Smith’s CV reveals that the closest he has come to scientific credentials is working as a ballroom dance instructor and a flying carpet yogi. Genetic Roulette is so packed with scientific misunderstanding and misinformation that a group of actual scientific experts established a Web site to counter and explain, point by point, some 65 false claims.

4 thoughts on “Send in the anti-GMO clowns

  1. The quote of “extremists and charlatans” is so appropriate for this issue. There are so many clowns out there who ask questions like, “Is baking soda GMO?” So telling of the educational background of these followers. It think that it is great that you have this blog to counter more of the loonies and “their science.”

  2. Perhaps a bit of research would prove beneficial. There is a huge difference between selective breeding, which has been practiced for an undocumented number of years, and genetic engineering. I do believe the first genetically engineered foodstuff was entered into the market in 1996. Your third paragraph is “so telling of the educational background of (your) followers”, to quote the ignoramus with the second response.

  3. I do hope you will research a bit, your claims are incorrect 🙂

    “Groundbreaking peer reviewed study published in the International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability finds that the combination of non-GM seed and management practices used by western Europe is increasing corn yields faster than the GM technology chosen by the US. GM crops yield less and use more pesticides. Pack it in, Monsanto. GM FAIL!”

    http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14929%3Anon-gm-farming-outcompetes-gm-qaa-with-study-authors

    Think the Anti-GMO Movement is Unscientific? Think Again June 19, 2013
    http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/think-anti-gmo-movement-is-unscientific.html

    Downloadable Document – Glyphosate formulations
    http://www.greenmedinfo.com/sites/default/files/free_downloads/gpub_78151_toxic_ingredient_glyphosate_formulations.pdf

    Is the Movement to Label GMOs Anti-Science?
    1. Does the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) do safety testing on genetically modified crops?
    2. What are voluntary safety consultations?
    3. What are the potential health risks associated with Genetically Engineered Crops?
    4. The Séralini study published in October, 2012, has gotten a lot of criticism. Do you think it has merit?
    5. Have GMOs helped to feed the world, reduce the use of pesticides, or increase yield as proponents have promised?
    6. Why do you think foods with GMO ingredients should be labeled?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carole-bartolotto/is-the-movement-to-label-_b_3432355.html

    Signed, another anti-gmo clown 🙂

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: